James A. Shine v. Fox Brothers Manufacturing Company, No 383 (1910)
Court: Supreme Court of the United States
Number: No 383
Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 07, 1910
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: 216 U.S. 609 30 S. Ct. 575 54 L. Ed. 636 JAMES A. SHINE et al., Appellants, v. FOX BROTHERS MANUFACTURING COMPANY. No 383. Supreme Court of the United States March 7, 1910 1 Messrs. Shepard Barclay, Thomas T. Fauntleroy, and Cornelius H. Fauntleroy for appellants. 2 Messrs. Herbert R. Marlatt and Frank H. Sullivan for appellee. 3 Per Curiam: In the circumstances disclosed by this record, we are of opinion that a direct appeal does not lie to this court from the decree of the circuit court, and t
Summary: 216 U.S. 609 30 S. Ct. 575 54 L. Ed. 636 JAMES A. SHINE et al., Appellants, v. FOX BROTHERS MANUFACTURING COMPANY. No 383. Supreme Court of the United States March 7, 1910 1 Messrs. Shepard Barclay, Thomas T. Fauntleroy, and Cornelius H. Fauntleroy for appellants. 2 Messrs. Herbert R. Marlatt and Frank H. Sullivan for appellee. 3 Per Curiam: In the circumstances disclosed by this record, we are of opinion that a direct appeal does not lie to this court from the decree of the circuit court, and th..
More
216 U.S. 609
30 S. Ct. 575
54 L. Ed. 636
JAMES A. SHINE et al., Appellants,
v.
FOX BROTHERS MANUFACTURING COMPANY.
No 383.
Supreme Court of the United States
March 7, 1910
1
Messrs. Shepard Barclay, Thomas T. Fauntleroy, and Cornelius H. Fauntleroy for appellants.
2
Messrs. Herbert R. Marlatt and Frank H. Sullivan for appellee.
3
Per Curiam: In the circumstances disclosed by this record, we are of opinion that a direct appeal does not lie to this court from the decree of the circuit court, and the appeal is therefore dismissed.
Source: CourtListener
